Cargando…

Evaluating Charge Equilibration Methods To Generate Electrostatic Fields in Nanoporous Materials

[Image: see text] Charge equilibration (Qeq) methods can estimate the electrostatic potential of molecules and periodic frameworks by assigning point charges to each atom, using only a small fraction of the resources needed to compute density functional (DFT)-derived charges. This makes possible, fo...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Ongari, Daniele, Boyd, Peter G., Kadioglu, Ozge, Mace, Amber K., Keskin, Seda, Smit, Berend
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: American Chemical Society 2018
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6328974/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30419163
http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/acs.jctc.8b00669
_version_ 1783386745144868864
author Ongari, Daniele
Boyd, Peter G.
Kadioglu, Ozge
Mace, Amber K.
Keskin, Seda
Smit, Berend
author_facet Ongari, Daniele
Boyd, Peter G.
Kadioglu, Ozge
Mace, Amber K.
Keskin, Seda
Smit, Berend
author_sort Ongari, Daniele
collection PubMed
description [Image: see text] Charge equilibration (Qeq) methods can estimate the electrostatic potential of molecules and periodic frameworks by assigning point charges to each atom, using only a small fraction of the resources needed to compute density functional (DFT)-derived charges. This makes possible, for example, the computational screening of thousands of microporous structures to assess their performance for the adsorption of polar molecules. Recently, different variants of the original Qeq scheme were proposed to improve the quality of the computed point charges. One focus of this research was to improve the gas adsorption predictions in metal–organic frameworks (MOFs), for which many different structures are available. In this work, we review the evolution of the method from the original Qeq scheme, understanding the role of the different modifications on the final output. We evaluated the result of combining different protocols and set of parameters, by comparing the Qeq charges with high quality DFT-derived DDEC charges for 2338 MOF structures. We focused on the systematic errors that are attributable to specific atom types to quantify the final precision that one can expect from Qeq methods in the context of gas adsorption where the electrostatic potential plays a significant role, namely, CO(2) and H(2)S adsorption. In conclusion, both the type of algorithm and the input parameters have a large impact on the resulting charges, and we draw some guidelines to help the user to choose the proper combination of the two for obtaining a meaningful set of charges. We show that, considering this set of MOFs, the accuracy of the original Qeq scheme is often still comparable with the most recent variants, even if it clearly fails in the presence of certain atom types, such as alkali metals.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6328974
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher American Chemical Society
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-63289742019-01-17 Evaluating Charge Equilibration Methods To Generate Electrostatic Fields in Nanoporous Materials Ongari, Daniele Boyd, Peter G. Kadioglu, Ozge Mace, Amber K. Keskin, Seda Smit, Berend J Chem Theory Comput [Image: see text] Charge equilibration (Qeq) methods can estimate the electrostatic potential of molecules and periodic frameworks by assigning point charges to each atom, using only a small fraction of the resources needed to compute density functional (DFT)-derived charges. This makes possible, for example, the computational screening of thousands of microporous structures to assess their performance for the adsorption of polar molecules. Recently, different variants of the original Qeq scheme were proposed to improve the quality of the computed point charges. One focus of this research was to improve the gas adsorption predictions in metal–organic frameworks (MOFs), for which many different structures are available. In this work, we review the evolution of the method from the original Qeq scheme, understanding the role of the different modifications on the final output. We evaluated the result of combining different protocols and set of parameters, by comparing the Qeq charges with high quality DFT-derived DDEC charges for 2338 MOF structures. We focused on the systematic errors that are attributable to specific atom types to quantify the final precision that one can expect from Qeq methods in the context of gas adsorption where the electrostatic potential plays a significant role, namely, CO(2) and H(2)S adsorption. In conclusion, both the type of algorithm and the input parameters have a large impact on the resulting charges, and we draw some guidelines to help the user to choose the proper combination of the two for obtaining a meaningful set of charges. We show that, considering this set of MOFs, the accuracy of the original Qeq scheme is often still comparable with the most recent variants, even if it clearly fails in the presence of certain atom types, such as alkali metals. American Chemical Society 2018-11-12 2019-01-08 /pmc/articles/PMC6328974/ /pubmed/30419163 http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/acs.jctc.8b00669 Text en Copyright © 2018 American Chemical Society This is an open access article published under an ACS AuthorChoice License (http://pubs.acs.org/page/policy/authorchoice_termsofuse.html) , which permits copying and redistribution of the article or any adaptations for non-commercial purposes.
spellingShingle Ongari, Daniele
Boyd, Peter G.
Kadioglu, Ozge
Mace, Amber K.
Keskin, Seda
Smit, Berend
Evaluating Charge Equilibration Methods To Generate Electrostatic Fields in Nanoporous Materials
title Evaluating Charge Equilibration Methods To Generate Electrostatic Fields in Nanoporous Materials
title_full Evaluating Charge Equilibration Methods To Generate Electrostatic Fields in Nanoporous Materials
title_fullStr Evaluating Charge Equilibration Methods To Generate Electrostatic Fields in Nanoporous Materials
title_full_unstemmed Evaluating Charge Equilibration Methods To Generate Electrostatic Fields in Nanoporous Materials
title_short Evaluating Charge Equilibration Methods To Generate Electrostatic Fields in Nanoporous Materials
title_sort evaluating charge equilibration methods to generate electrostatic fields in nanoporous materials
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6328974/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30419163
http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/acs.jctc.8b00669
work_keys_str_mv AT ongaridaniele evaluatingchargeequilibrationmethodstogenerateelectrostaticfieldsinnanoporousmaterials
AT boydpeterg evaluatingchargeequilibrationmethodstogenerateelectrostaticfieldsinnanoporousmaterials
AT kadiogluozge evaluatingchargeequilibrationmethodstogenerateelectrostaticfieldsinnanoporousmaterials
AT maceamberk evaluatingchargeequilibrationmethodstogenerateelectrostaticfieldsinnanoporousmaterials
AT keskinseda evaluatingchargeequilibrationmethodstogenerateelectrostaticfieldsinnanoporousmaterials
AT smitberend evaluatingchargeequilibrationmethodstogenerateelectrostaticfieldsinnanoporousmaterials